Systematic rebalancing is not necessarily best way to go

The value of systematic rebalancing of portfolios to bring them back closer to strategic allocations has been questioned in new research by Morgan Stanley.The research, by Morgan Stanley’s Martin Leibowitz and Anthony Bova, indicates that portfolios which have not been rebalanced over a 10-year period, have either outperformed those which were rebalanced quarterly or closely matched them for returns.

The main reason for this is that the non-rebalanced portfolios capture the value in market momentum which tends to be lost through rebalancing according to a fixed time schedule.

The authors recommend, instead, that institutional and other investors have a program of “slow rebalancing”, which will avoid much of the dangers of not rebalancing in a bubble but at the same time capture some of the upside from momentum.

They say: “The no-rebalancing strategy has disadvantages in its greater volatility, its beta drift and its intrinsic ‘untidiness’. However, the surprising finding is the extent to which the non-rebalanced portfolio values either exceed or closely match those obtained with more standard rebalancing strategies.

“To the extent that these results can be generalised beyond this specific model, they are supportive of a more flexible and more strategic ‘slow balancing’ approach to realigning a fund’s structure over time.”

The study indicates that setting ranges, such that rebalancing occurs after the portfolio reaches a certain maximum or minimum value, has some benefit but this, too, is not significant compared with either non-rebalanced or quarterly rebalanced portfolios.

Sponsored Content

Slow balancing involves the investor deferring the rebalancing action to a time when it more closely coincides with general revisions in the policy portfolio.

This therefore requires a more active approach to the allocation by the investor, along the lines of a dynamic asset allocation – looking at a shorter time horizon than strategic asset allocation but longer than tactical asset allocation.

Details of the study can be viewed at www.morganstanley.com

Leave a Comment

Sort content by

Future Fund could manage others’ money

Managing money for default super is a possibility for Australia’s sovereign wealth fund. Its leadership also said becoming more ‘nimble’ and adding activity in venture and growth were priorities.

Carlyle MD says cycle isn’t done

Carlyle’s Jason Thomas says private-equity investors miss out when they try to call the top of the cycle. He thinks Trump’s impact has been overblown and that the current cycle isn’t done yet.

CalPERS says consultants could do better

CalPERS is happy with its consultants, except for their performance in recommending ways to control fees and costs and their presentation of new investment ideas, a board rating reveals.

Dutch pension funds embrace UN goals

PGGM and APG are well advanced in developing a process to identify potential sustainable development investment opportunities that could transform the UN’s targets into tangible returns.

5-yearly power transfer looms in China

As China readies for its five-yearly leadership reshuffle, global investors are watching to see how they’re poised to manage the world’s second-largest economy as it faces up to its debt dilemma.

Satyajit Das: access real income

Author Satyajit Das, who warned about derivatives before the GFC, says debt levels have turned the whole world into a carry trade and managers need to get close to real income streams.

Previous